beta
Text
1. The Defendant imposed charges for causing traffic congestion of KRW 24,027,240 on Plaintiff Samsung C&T Co., Ltd. on October 7, 2016.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff Samsung C&T Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “T&T”) operates the “Dongksan C&T club”, which is a golf club located in the 66 (Instigation), Geum-gu, Busan. The Plaintiff, an incorporated Busan Busan C&T club (hereinafter “U&T club”) operates the “Mansan C&T club,” which is a golf club located in the 2327-ro, P&T, Busan, P&T, P.M., the center of the Geum-gu, Busan (No. 2327).
B. The Defendant has imposed charges for causing traffic congestion on the facilities attached to each of the above golf clubs by applying the traffic inducement coefficient of the "sports facilities: Sports facilities, subdivisions: sports facilities (which do not correspond to neighborhood life facilities)" in Article 3-3 [Attachment Table 4] of the Enforcement Rule of the Urban Traffic Improvement Promotion Act and Article 3-2 [Attachment Table 2] of the Ordinance on the Charges for causing Traffic congestion in Busan Metropolitan City (hereinafter referred to as the "Attachment Table" in the above attached Table) with respect to the facilities attached to the above golf clubs (hereinafter referred to as "facilities of this case"), which are subject to 6.72 of the [Attachment Table 1], which are owned by the Plaintiffs of the above golf clubs. As to the charges for causing traffic congestion in the year 2016, the Defendant imposed charges for causing traffic congestion on the Plaintiff Samsung C&san on July 7, 2016, by applying the traffic inducement coefficient of the facilities of this case 6.72 (the adjusted adjusted upward by Article 37(2) of the same Act).
C. The Plaintiffs appealed and filed an administrative appeal, but was dismissed on February 21, 2017.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1-4, Gap's evidence Nos. 1-4, Eul's evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, and 6 (including provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The gist of the plaintiffs' assertion is that the facilities in this case are located in a golf course, which is a "sports facility" under the Building Act and other relevant statutes, as prescribed in the attached Table of this case.